Trans Fats Banned

In this article from msnbc, the new trans fat banned in New York City is discussed and how the public is reacting. Trans fats are believed to be harmful because they contribute to heart disease by raising bad cholesterol and lowering good cholesterol at the same time. Some experts say that makes trans fats worse than saturated fat. The FDA estimates the average American eats 4.7 pounds of trans fats each year. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who banned smoking in bars and restaurants during his first term, seems somewhat health-obsessed, and even maintains a monthly weight-loss competition with one of his friends in order to stay slim. The mayor has contributed in great ways to NYC, but maybe he should stop living his life through his city.

I believe in making our country, even our world a healthier, cleaner, and better place. However, when it comes to certain ingredients in foods I think we're pushing it a bit far. People will find their fatty foods whether we like it or not. It is their choice what they put in their bodies, not the government's. And that's disregarding our economy...you know...this little recession we are in. Bakeries and restaurants are frustrated with the Mayor because it hurts their businesses greatly.

New York’s decision to ban trans fats has mostly been greatly supported by health and medical groups, although the American Heart Association warns that if restaurants aren’t given ample time to make the switch, they could end up reverting to ingredients high in saturated fat, which is just as bad.

Guantanamo

David M. Herszenhorn writes an article in the Times about Guantanamo Bay and Obama's new plan. On Wednesday, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to cut from a war spending bill $80 million that was requested by Obama to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. However, now they plan to transfew the detainess to the United States and its territories. The problem is that we don't want to be responsible for these potential criminals, yet we don't want them running around our neighborhoods either. Obama is also trying to rid the dentainees to other countries, basically so they wont be our problem.

Selling our fugitives to other countries, I think, is the only solution, and there for a good idea. Realistically they will be fine if kept in the U.S. but the citizens probably wouldn't be too cool with that. We have enough problems as it is so I think other countries would be willing to hold these criminals for us. Besides, I'm sure they want them to be kept safe and know where they are.

Cloning

In John Terry's article, a strange foreseeing of what to come of cloning is examined. Basically, humans are soon to be cloned, but probably not in the United States. Asia offers researchers new labs, fewer restrictions and a different view of divinity and the afterlife.In South Korea, when Hwang Woo Suk reported creating human embryonic stem cells through cloning, he did not apologize for offending religious taboos. He justified cloning by citing his Buddhist belief in recycling life through reincarnation.Most of southern and eastern Asia displays relatively little opposition to either cloned embryonic stem-cell research or genetically modified crops.

I'm not too interested in this whole cloning ordeal but I'm running out of topics, so this was one of the few controversies left. It just seems strange...are the clones going to be complete human beings with emotions and intellect or are they solely going to be cloning organs in need? I don't want to be living "The Island" if you know what I'm saying. We can't just create human beings and kill them for their livers so that alcoholics can live. Population control people. We can't afford the people we have living on this world today...we don't need twice as many. Mo people, mo problems.

Social Security

Robert Pear's article addresses the declining benefits to our elderly. He notes that this will be the first year, in three decades, that Social Security recipients will not get any increase on their benefits. Even Medicare trust funds are deteriorating. Last year, Social Security and Medicare totaled to one third of the federal budget, $1 trillion. We obviously don't have that money anymore, so our elderly is going to be severely impacted. President Obama's budget for the future also assumes no increase of pay toward Social Security and Medicare in the next few years.

I don't really know where to stand on this. I don't like the money that comes out of my paycheck to go to 70 year old women to play tennis in Florida but I just don't know what they expect to do with all the old people that are going to loose there homes, insurance, and necessities. Many senior citizens are already barely living on the money they make, so now with the decrease coming from government they will definitely be short. I just don't think the outcome will be helpful to our countries recession. I mean, what could be more important than keeping people alive; infrastructure....military?

I'm obviously far from comprehending our federal budget as a whole, but it doesn't seem right that seniors are suffering when they can't really do much about it.

Athletes and Steroids

Dean Norland of Washington takes time in his abc article to talk about the current problems of steroid use. Basically, professional athletes are still using steroids and its effecting our youth. Athletes are not standing up and talking about steroid abuse and how harmful it is. Rather, no one is saying anything, and high school and college athletes are beginning to use these drugs more and more to keep up with the game. Although drug testing has increased over the past few years and more users are getting caught and punished, something still needs to be done about organizations to control the youths steroid abuse.

It would be one thing if steroids couldn't harm you... but they can. So many health problems are caused by these drugs that they just aren't safe and should be illegal. I don't think high school, college, or professional athletes should be able to use them and I think all professional athletes should be tested regularly. If this drugs use continues then it will only get worse. The "ideal" will continue to become more and more unreachable to so many young athletes that they will go to unhealthy lengths to be "the best" they can be.

If professional, famous athletes would speak out more against these harmful drugs than it would have a great impact on our youth and kids would stop abusing and getting hurt. And besides, I think, for the most part, the public wants to see human beings playing sports, not robots and bodybuilders.

Nuclear Weapons

In this article, Jonathan Schell gives opposing views on nuclear weapons, and what should be done about them. Pro Nuclear's say that they will be made anyway, even if they are "abolished", those who want to make them will. They also claim it prevents conventional war. Others argue that a single mistake in the making of a bomb could destroy a city, a country, or the world.

I don't think that nuclear weapons should be made or used. I think they are mass murdering machines that kill innocence. However, I think that even if nuclear weapons were abolished people would still be making them, so what is the point. If someone is sick enough to want to make one and set it off, nothing will stop them.

When they say it prevents conventional war, there correct, but I question if that is necessarily a good thing. Wouldn't we rather have an army of men that want to fight get killed than millions of innocent people? And nuclear war, for the most part, can take out a lot more people than a conventional war can.

Censorship

In this D.L. Hughley article , the author talks about how Hughley's show on CNN, Breaking the News, was canceled. He claims that it was because of family matters but others think that he was "just too hot" for the news network. In the finale show, he talks about his chronic back pain and how he uses medicinal marijuana. However, his finale show was censored because of the marijuana references. The "CNN higher-ups" say that it's business as usual and they always edit clips out. The author asks if this is fair and, although the network claims they want to work with him again, will Hughley ever be seen on CNN again?

I, personally, don't think its fair that his show was censored. I understand adult language and maybe violence. But if it is talking about medicinal marijuana, they don't really have the right to take it out. And it's CNN...adults watch CNN, not children. I don't think D.L. Hughley is influencing many on smoking pot. I'm not familiar with the show, but if its just showing his life, and he is just going to pick up medicine, how can CNN just cut that out?

Censorship is getting out of hand. Between music, movies and television. The thing is, if its children people are worried about, they are getting to whatever they want to see if you allow it or not. It's pathetic when you're listening to the radio and the music just stops every couple minutes. Just let it play. If parents don't want their kids listening to it, change the channel to oldies. And honestly, you're out of luck, because if they want to hear that music, they can just jump on their computers and download tripple x porn if they want.

Marijuana legalization

In this CNN article, many issues are mentioned this blog's purpose will be focused on the legalization of marijuana. The article talks about many economist, politicians, and policemen who agree that the legalization of marijuana would be beneficial to our economy. Most importantly, it will save us a lot of money. Cops claim that money and time is wasted with arrests on possession. Most pot-smokers will not stop even if they do get in trouble with the law. Economist and politicians argue that we would make much more money as a country if marijuana was legalized and taxed.

This is very true. If everyone was forced to buy pot from a government store and it was taxed than the U.S. would have a sufficient increase in tax dollars, no questions asked.

To this day, marijuana, has yet to kill anyone. How many problems, death, and injuries has alcohol caused? Alcohol is more harmful than pot but for some reason alcohol is legal and marijuana is not. Every one that wants to smoke pot does it anyway...even though they know its against the law. It is an embarrassment to our society, along with the rate of underage drinking.

Euthanasia

The author in this article talks about how assisted suicide is not the same thing as euthanasia and shouldn't be compared. They give a statistic showing that the majority of Michigan is in favor of assisted suicide so people shouldn't be quick to judge what society really wants and believes.

I agree with the author and think that to an extent assisted suicide should be allowed. From what I have read, people make euthanasia out to be murder, as if someone is being killed without consent. That, I do not believe in. So I think, to the author's point, the terms euthanasia and assisted suicide should be separated when debated whats legal/moral or not.

I think if someone is in serious pain, and is announced hostile or is highly likely to die, than I think assisted suicide is the answer, especially if it is under there wishes. Isn't it torture to force someone through immense pain just to wait to die when all they do is want it to end.

I think with family, doctor, and patient approval as well as legal jurisdiction, assisted suicide should be allowed to patients in hostile in severe amounts of pain.

Illegal Immigration

Sheila Davis explains the problem and the answer perfectly in her New York Times article.

She correctly explains how they just don't have the right to be in the country. It is fine if they become a citizen, follow the law, and pay taxes. But it isn't fair that actual citizens are paying for the same benefits that the immigrants are getting for free. President Obama needs to take a stand in this situation and reinforce immigration laws. Not only that, but it's effecting our economy. There are millions of people jobless in the United States right now. We cannot afford to have immigrants, illegally enter the country, and take jobs away from law-abiding citizens. They estimate that in the next coming years, billions of dollars will be paid to working illegal immigrants. However, if they weren't in the country, this money could go to the millions of unemployed citizens, with a tax, which would give back to and help our country as a whole.

Some argue that immigrants do the jobs that no one else wants to do. And I would have to say to that two things. Firstly, okay, you can do that job after/while you become a citizen as well...correct? Secondly, I honestly think that right now, in our economy, people will do whatever work they can get to make a living.

Also, not mentioned in the article, illegal immigrants are making harder for citizens to get into college. They are getting financial aid, school funds, and scholarships that, frankly, don't belong to them, but belong to the taxpaying citizens, who also can't afford to pay for college.

Is it fair that these illegal aliens aren't paying their respective dues to our nation, but are being granted scholarships, financial aid, social security, government protection, and welfare?

Gun Control

Thinking hes quite the comic, the author sarcastically lists reasons why one would support gun control in this fire-powered article.

I think my favorites are, "You like to discriminate against women and deny them the means of defending themselves" or "You enjoy punishing small children who have done nothing wrong."

Yes...I favor gun control because I want women and children to be punished...

But the one "reason" I would like to talk about is number 10. "You enjoy leaving students defenseless against school shooters". It explains how the past couple school shootings were all in gun-free zones and how "law-abiding students with bright futures" will keep their guns at home. The author goes on to note the example of the time where an armed student was able to stop a school shooter. So, I guess he is trying to say that if everyone was able to have a gun, then school shootings would stop and if they did occur...other students will have guns too, so they can just pop the shooter themselves!

Number nine talks about how if you favor gun control, than you like politicians that treat themselves more favorable than they treat their citizens. I don't care whether my government can shoot guns or not...it is the community, the majority, the citizens rights that need to be dealt with.

The author also claims that people in favor of gun-control must just be scared of guns because they have never owned one or used one. I don't need to own a gun to realize I don't need one as well as the millions of people across the U.S. that don't need one.

I understand that people feel safer with a gun and that despite any control laws, people will still get their hands on them. But you must ask yourself both these questions. How often do you hear about a shooting attack on an innocent citizen? How often do you hear about a gun owner, using his weapon in defense?

Prayer in Schools

In Jesse J. Holland's article, he explains the situation of a high school football team whose coach insisted on prayer during practices, games, gatherings, etc. A few parents complained, and here we have our controversy.

"Coaches are not supposed to be promoting religion; that's up to students and parents and pastors," Lynn said....I mean bottom line right? Separation of church and state is the oldest rule in the book....literally. If a parent, child, or family's desire is to be brought up in a religious environment they can attend a private religious school...that is what they are for. Public schools, like this particular article's East Brunswick High School, shouldn't be introducing, practicing or preaching about any kind of religion during school/school activities. Teachers and coaches shouldn't be influencing students on their beliefs. It's a family, personal matter that shouldn't forced in schools.

I just think that if a family or teacher is religious they should be part of a school that is specific to their beliefs. No one wants to hear it at a public school so why bother? If this particular coach was very religious and wanted to pray to whatever god he worshiped I think he could have prayed to himself... why bring the team into it when parents are going to complain? It baffles me how an adult could think that was appropriate.

Capital Punishment

To kill or not to kill, that is the question.

Adam Liptak bases his article on money, much like the rest of the U.S. government. He was able to capture a few economist takes on the issue and how they think capital punishment should be dealt with.

As the article reads, according to recent studies, execution works, saving 3-18 lives for every death and that overall, across the country, murder rates tend to fall as execution rises. However, many of these economist who have done several studies proving that capital punishment is affective, still morally don't agree with the concept; ie....one economist said they are opposed to the death penalty, even though their study showed capital punishment save about 5 lives.

As much as people are morally against it, they are economically against it as well. Liptak asks, "A single capital litigation can cost more than $1 million. It is at least possible that devoting that money to crime prevention would prevent more murders than whatever number, if any, an execution would deter." This may be true, but some argue that they don't want their tax dollars to be wasted on criminals sitting in jail.

Morally, I don't think that capital punishment is right, however if it is preventing more crimes than how can we stop doing it?

It is a hard topic to judge because of morality, so I think we should look at this from an economical stand point. If it is costing us too much money to execute them, then we shouldn't. But is it fair that law abiding citizens must pay for murderers, who will most likely be there for the rest of their life, to sleep and eat together?

Affrimative Action

I found a few articles on affirmative action. Mainly just examples of when it was abused or useful in the past. Then I came across this "article", which frankly is only a paragraph explaining how mindless the concept really is, to which I strongly agree.

This author says it perfect. The theory is of affirmative action is discrimination in itself. "Its policies totally judge people solely on skin color and gender"...exactly.

If a man and a woman are applying for a job and the man is more qualified, is it really fair that the woman gets hired...just because they have met there maximum amount of men on the payroll?

I understand the benefits this may have...there are still racist, sexist people out there who don't treat people equally. But I think, nowadays, in terms of scholarships and jobs it's causing more problems than it's solving.

Abortion

In an article I recently read, I received opposing views on the topic of abortion.

It begins with the philosophy that an abortion should be considered based on the "child's" brain progression. How much he can think or feel should determine if the life can be terminated or not. They claim that if the child is conscious than it is not fair for a mother to make that decision.

Some people, according to the article, think no matter how far along the "child" is, the life shouldn't be "extinguished". While other claim, "just because a fetus is alive doesn't mean that he or she is a person". There is also talk of the bible. Some of these people base their theory on personal religious views. I thought church and state were separated a long time ago?

I, myself, am pro-choice and believe the mother has the choice to have a baby or not. It is a fetus, it is not murder. You are not killing a child. However, if you are forced to have a baby that you know you can not provide for and give a healthy life to, then aren't you setting it up for failure anyway?

As of now, in the recession, we can't even provide for the hundreds of millions of people in our country today. Why would we bring more human beings into this country, when we know we don't have the money to provide for them? It is a lose-lose situation.

"The real question is why so many people want to take life away from a little human being who brings so much joy and meaning to life".......No one wants to take a life away. There will be no joy and meaning if the child grows up in an insufficient household, incapable of fostering a child. The U.S. is struggling. Our country is billions of dollars in debt. We can't not only afford to pay for the people in our country now, but we can't even afford the children that are being born by choice.